How Marketable/Attractive is this team?

[MVP23]

Someone made a joke a few years ago about how if we did beat the Celtics and go on to the Finals, ABC would decline to show the games and we would be on FSN. We haven't changed that much since 07-08. We still have our basic core. I wonder how other NBA fans view us. Our attendance is terrible compared to where it should be, but unemployment is still relevantly high. Atlanta is an attractive city though. We don't have a house hold name on the team, although people like Smoove and Joe are well known throughout the NBA. Our uniforms (uniforms matter people...trust me) are pretty cool looking. I'm wonder, try to be unbiased here, on a scale to 1-10, how attractive and marketable is this team to Atlanta, and to the NBA in general..

[yungsta]

i give a 6 or 7

[Guest Squawker]

Well, as for me i would rate the Hawks a 7 and 8 on a good day. But i mostly enjoy watching all basketball.

[MaceCase]

http://www.forbes.com/lists/2011/32/basketball-valuations-11_land.html

We are the 23rd most attractive team in the league.

[yungsta]

even the nets r more valuable then us wtf?

[Joker]

To be honest, a 3. Boring team, no exciting players except Crawford who is not good enough to have a fanbase and no real team history. Numbers don't lie and our viewership is the lowest in the NBA when we are on TV nationally. Our All Stars have much lower support than others. Most casual fans don't watch us, including us. We are a small market team with a quality team but no real fan support. Locally and nationally. I think ASG knows this too.

Josh Smith is like Iggy, exciting in terms of highlights but not one who has a fanbase.

Joe Johnson is known as the boring superstar, enuff said.

Al Horford is our most respected player nationally and talent wise.

Jamal Crawford is our most exciting player. Bar none.

The rest are irrelevant to even mention.

Our core is weak. Our role players have topped off and some are declining.

Our young players like Teague and Jordan have potential but are a couple years away.

We need a move. One that can add a player to the core of Horford, Smith, and Johnson.

Clearly a core player is a very good player for us since we don't have a superstar.

It's needs to be a PG or a Center. Doesn't have to be a true PG but it does have to be a true Center since we have a true PF in Horford and a tweener in Smoove.

We need young players with these talents. It's clear we aren't a contender. They don't show signs when up by 20 much less down by 10.

No team discipline. No post scoring but that's not a biggie unless you can penetrate and draw contract for fouls. No depth. Trading Jamal would kill our bench even with Marvin and Bibby on the bench but our bench is just going need to grow. No trades can help us, we need to draft well and more experienced college players unlike Teague and Jordan.

Potentially, we do have big market potential but we have to be contenders are at least attractive before that happens.

Otherwise, I don't see any hope.

[AUhawksfan]

I would give us about a 4 for marketability. This team just doesn't have the right group of players to attract the fans.

The Falcons had Vick, now it's Matty Ice and Roddy White. The Braves had fan favorites and quite a history (Hank Aaron, Maddux, Chipper, etc etc)

Our "best" player is quiet, socially awkward, and doesn't really endear himself to the fans. Josh Smith has potential for the city to embrace him but he can't get his head on straight or play smart on a consistent basis. Al is a good hard worker but isn't a sportscenter highlight reel so he kind of flies under the radar of the casual fan and national media.

I want what I think many fans want: a new, exciting (and hopefully marketable) face to energize the fan base. I'm really hoping a trade happens. I'm honestly getting tired of seeing the same faces, the same mistakes, the same blown leads, all of which gives us the same outcome.....an early exit from the playoffs.

Shaq would have definitely helped in marketability and at least maybe a minor improvement in the win column. I don't care how old the guy is, he's still an upgrade over Collins and Zaza.

[AUhawksfan]

Potentially, we do have big market potential but we have to be contenders are at least attractive before that happens.

Otherwise, I don't see any hope.

Oh yeah, I forgot about Crawford who is exciting but can be streaky due to his shot taking.

I agree that we have the potential. The Spurs are an example. They aren't necessarily an exciting team but they play smart, sound basketball and year in year out they are competing in the playoffs with a legit shot at winning it all. At the same time, they have grown quite the fan base in San Antonio....a city that I wouldn't necessarily think of as a sports town.

[sasuke]

I visit a lot of nba forums and the general opinion on the Hawks is that they're one of the most boring teams to watch with one of the worst fan base.

[Joker]

Oh yeah, I forgot about Crawford who is exciting but can be streaky due to his shot taking.

I agree that we have the potential. The Spurs are an example. They aren't necessarily an exciting team but they play smart, sound basketball and year in year out they are competing in the playoffs with a legit shot at winning it all. At the same time, they have grown quite the fan base in San Antonio....a city that I wouldn't necessarily think of as a sports town.

The Squrs have great overall depth, a superstar impact guy in TD, and two very good players. We need to get another star to add to the core before we can even think about being contenders. We will never play smart with this core, ever. That's okay but right now, I think we are the Washington Wizards when they had Gilbert Arenas, Jamison, Butler and outside of the core, Hughes. Hughes being Jamal, and the rest is like ours. The only difference was they ran into Cleveland and we ran into worst teams. This year, we won't have that fortune. We even run a similar offense and we both have Etan Thomas. Just we have a much worst version.

I would say that in terms of ability at the time of their era:

Arenas>>Joe

Horford>>Jamison

Butler=Smith

Crawford=Hughes for their roles. Hughes was good in his as the playmaker how can play defense and Crawford as the 6th man. Why did Cleveland sign Hughes who's best strength is playmaking with Lebron who is the dominant ball handler for Cleveland. Smh, Cleveland.

The same team. One star away for both teams. Washington didn't get that star and blew it up. We will see what the Hawks will do.

[Diesel]

I think there's two things to consider.

Basketball wise

and

Market wise.

Basketball wise means as a basketball team, where do we rate?

We're about the 9-10th best team in basketball (believe it or not). I would think that we play well and we have lots of talent. The coaching is questionable and with better coaching, we could possibly be 5th.

Marketing wise. We are low. Not so much because of our location but because of the weakness of our fanbase. The fanbase is a marketing agent's barometer. IF we had the cameron crazies in the Phil, then we would probably be the most exciting and most marketable team in the NBA. Teams like NY and LA have real followings. Otherwise, Stern has forced the league to be a player's league. He knew that he could always count on players to show up and carry the league whereas he couldn't say the same for teams. I think that this is part of the problem with us. We don't carry fans because we lack star power...

BUT>>>>>>>>>

Every pundit awaits for Atlanta to step up!

[AUhawksfan]

The Squrs have great overall depth, a superstar impact guy in TD, and two very good players. We need to get another star to add to the core before we can even think about being contenders. We will never play smart with this core, ever. That's okay but right now, I think we are the Washington Wizards when they had Gilbert Arenas, Jamison, Butler and outside of the core, Hughes. Hughes being Jamal, and the rest is like ours. The only difference was they ran into Cleveland and we ran into worst teams. This year, we won't have that fortune. We even run a similar offense and we both have Etan Thomas. Just we have a much worst version.

Yeah the Spurs have a higher IQ team and more quality players, but my point was just that you don't necessarily need a flashy superstar to be good and attract a fanbase. Tim Duncan isn't that fun to watch nor are most players on that team but they win, make good decisions, and have a good coach and the fans appreciate that.

I think a flashy fan favorite would definitely draw more people to Philips Arena, but I don't think that's the only answer to fill the seats.

[dlpin]

As an outsider who occasionally watches the hawks, let me try to get my opinion across.

I am not a "superstar" kind of fan, that tunes in just to see the big names, but I would imagine people who are aren't drawn to the hawks.

But as a fan of good basketball, the hawks, to me, are no different of other good teams that have no real shot. So it is probably the same way Hawks' fans see other good teams who are either unwilling or unable to do what is needed to become a contender.

Arenas' Wizards team is a good example someone mentioned. The current incarnation of the jazz too. Other examples would likely include the trailblazers. Not arguing whether the Hawks are better or worse than any of these teams. But these are teams that have somewhat plateaued (unlike young teams like OKC or free agent magnets like NYK) and that no one expects will pull a blockbuster move to get over the hump. Good teams that if healthy can likely win 50 games every season, but that most people would be very surprised if they made it to the conference finals, and completely shocked if they won the conference.

[Joker]

I think there's two things to consider.

Basketball wise

and

Market wise.

Basketball wise means as a basketball team, where do we rate?

We're about the 9-10th best team in basketball (believe it or not). I would think that we play well and we have lots of talent. The coaching is questionable and with better coaching, we could possibly be 5th.

Marketing wise. We are low. Not so much because of our location but because of the weakness of our fanbase. The fanbase is a marketing agent's barometer. IF we had the cameron crazies in the Phil, then we would probably be the most exciting and most marketable team in the NBA. Teams like NY and LA have real followings. Otherwise, Stern has forced the league to be a player's league. He knew that he could always count on players to show up and carry the league whereas he couldn't say the same for teams. I think that this is part of the problem with us. We don't carry fans because we lack star power...

BUT>>>>>>>>>

Every pundit awaits for Atlanta to step up!

Diesel, we might be a top 12 team but most teams behind us are rebuilding and they are going up, we are stabilizing at just being very good and is going down since we have no real shot at being a contender with our current core at the moment. We don't play well, we just have a team that been together for awhile, knows how to win, and were very athletic. Once the playoffs starts and now that 1-5 is very good in the NBA and the teams have a lot less flaws than we do.

Orlando- People said they declined, that could be true but with Hedo, D12 has improved and is playing like a manchild. I hope we don't think Collins, Zaza, and Etan can do the job, smh.

Miami- Big 3

Boston- Big 4 and bench

Chicago- Rose is a top 10 player and have a nice group of 4 players.

Yeah the Spurs have a higher IQ team and more quality players, but my point was just that you don't necessarily need a flashy superstar to be good and attract a fanbase. Tim Duncan isn't that fun to watch nor are most players on that team but they win, make good decisions, and have a good coach and the fans appreciate that.

I think a flashy fan favorite would definitely draw more people to Philips Arena, but I don't think that's the only answer to fill the seats.

Tim Duncan is a top 5 player of all time in my mind. I am not understanding you on this one. Even in age, he still has more impact than anyone on this roster. If Atlanta had TD, I am pretty sure I would go watch the Hawks because we would always have a shot to win a title. Watching TD is like going to the Dome and watching the Falcons. They are boring but more than not, I think they can win a title and I think that their organization is superior to ASG just looking at what they accumulated. The flashy player isn't what's really needed, it's the great team or great player that's missing. If we had Gilbert Arenas Wizards instead of these Hawks, I would go see every game. Because even though they were flawed. Gilbert was a great talent and can carry his team with ease. No one on this Hawks team does anything with ease. Their boring, undisciplined, lazy, extremely weak in key areas. I don't like watching this team. I know they aren't going nowhere. I usually attend 10-20 games in a season and I live far from Phillips and I no longer work in the city either. I haven't attended a game and I don't plan to till Feb 24. That's my decision day on the Hawks. I have never been so frustrated with an organization. I am a very open person. I can change my mind if they are willing to play up to their acumen. I've even gave Josh a chance. Here was a player I hated almost as much as SAR for us. He was horrible, could only dunk, and use his superior athletic ability to block shots and etc. I did admire his determination, I respected that. He improved a lot, became a complete all around player, something that seemed impossible in 2006. He really impressed me over the years even if he has his issues.

Edited February 14, 2011 by nbasuperstar40

[AUhawksfan]

Tim Duncan is a top 5 player of all time in my mind. I am not understanding you on this one. Even in age, he still has more impact than anyone on this roster. If Atlanta had TD, I am pretty sure I would go watch the Hawks because we would always have a shot to win a title. Watching TD is like going to the Dome and watching the Falcons. They are boring but more than not, I think they can win a title and I think that their organization is superior to ASG just looking at what they accumulated. The flashy player isn't what's really needed, it's the great team or great player that's missing. If we had Gilbert Arenas Wizards instead of these Hawks, I would go see every game. Because even though they were flawed. Gilbert was a great talent and can carry his team with ease. No one on this Hawks team does anything with ease. Their boring, undisciplined, lazy, extremely weak in key areas. I don't like watching this team. I know they aren't going nowhere. I usually attend 10-20 games in a season and I live far from Phillips and I no longer work in the city either. I haven't attended a game and I don't plan to till Feb 24. That's my decision day on the Hawks. I have never been so frustrated with an organization. I am a very open person. I can change my mind if they are willing to play up to their acumen. I've even gave Josh a chance. Here was a player I hated almost as much as SAR for us. He was horrible, could only dunk, and use his superior athletic ability to block shots and etc. I did admire his determination, I respected that. He improved a lot, became a complete all around player, something that seemed impossible in 2006. He really impressed me over the years even if he has his issues.

Well you may not be understanding me, but that is my point exactly. Tim Duncan is in the upper echelon of NBA players but he doesn't play like Lebron or Dwight or Blake Griffin (meaning he doesn't make a Sportscenter highlight all the time). But he STILL gets his points and helps his team compete every year.

The point I'm trying to make is that you can have a marketable/attractive team without necessarily having a player that is all over the media, is all the talk on espn, and is a big fan favorite nationally.

[Joker]

Well you may not be understanding me, but that is my point exactly. Tim Duncan is in the upper echelon of NBA players but he doesn't play like Lebron or Dwight or Blake Griffin (meaning he doesn't make a Sportscenter highlight all the time). But he STILL gets his points and helps his team compete every year.

The point I'm trying to make is that you can have a marketable/attractive team without necessarily having a player that is all over the media, is all the talk on espn, and is a big fan favorite nationally.

Gotcha, didn't realize we were saying the same thing at first.